Maria Braden. Women Politicians and the Media. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1996. 235 pp. $29.95, cloth, ISBN 978-0-8131-1970-0.

Reviewed by Cynthia Harrison

Published on H-Women (January, 1997)

" .... Thefrst woman to be than to enlighten them on her policy agenda. nominated for Vice President.... Size six!" (p. 15). Once she cast her frst vote--against U.S. participa‐ So commented Tom Brokaw to the television tion in World War I--newspapers questioned both audience, while Ferraro accepted the cheers of her personal patriotism and her presumptively Democratic delegates during their 1984 party con‐ sex-based inability to reason (though 49 of her vention. As Maria Braden, professor of journalism male colleagues also voted against war). Braden at the University of Kentucky, points out in this devotes almost seven pages to Rankin, which anecdotal survey, Brokaw's focus on Ferraro's makes this sketch one of the longer ones; but be‐ dress size at so historic a moment has typifed the yond learning that the press at times trivialized media's handling of women political fgures. this pioneer, we learn little else. The furor over Braden observes that the media report about her second term and her vote--this time alone-- women in stereotypical ways, emphasizing their against U.S. entry into World War II, Braden dis‐ femininity and highlighting family relationships, patches in two sentences. After Rankin, Braden appearance, and clothing--aspects infrequently deals briefy in turn with mentioned when reporting about men. Although (R-OK), elected in 1920, Winifred Huck (R-IL), also Braden sees improvement, in part because of the in 1920, Rebecca Felton, a bigoted Democrat from increasing numbers of women in journalism, she who served fewer than 48 hours in the notes that lapses frequently occur. Senate in 1922, and the women who entered Con‐ gress after them. Braden begins her chronological narrative with the tale of 's reception by The problem with Braden's organization the press. As the frst woman elected to Congress, shows up clearly when (R- in 1916, the Republican predictably MA), like the others, rates only one paragraph. drew much media attention, but reporters sought Rogers, who succeeded her husband in the House to reassure readers about her femininity rather in 1925, served 35 years, a career during which, H-Net Reviews as Braden notes, she was much respected for her reportage from sexist reporting. Chapters on Fer‐ legislative skill. Mary Norton, a Democrat from raro's run for vice-president in 1984, the "Year of New Jersey, represented her district in the House the Woman" (i.e., 1992), and the Holtzman-Fer‐ for 25 years, chairing the House Committee on La‐ raro-Abrams primary fght the same year, rest bor during passage of the Fair Labor Standards upon candidates' impressions of media treatment, Act. Again, Braden limits her discussion, this time not Braden's independent interpretation. The f‐ to two paragraphs, thus missing the opportunity nal chapter on women ofceholders concludes to use the careers of Norton and Rogers (and that the situation is improving, but Braden omits those of other women who served over decades) a discussion of gendered reporting with respect to to examine a host of questions: Does the salience the "angry white male" who fgured so prominent‐ of sex decline in the media with time and authori‐ ly in 1994 and who therefore deserves some men‐ ty? Are all women Congress members treated in tion. the same way and, if not, what accounts for the More important, Braden does not do justice to diferences? Are some newspapers or reporters the impact of the phenomenal feminist tidal wave ahead of their time in the non-sexist assessment that swept the national landscape. She mentions of women legislators and, if so, why? Rather, the Stanford University Women's News Service Braden follows the disposition of the press to fo‐ but fails to remark on its genesis or on the impact cus on the attractive, not the powerful, women in overall of the women's movement on the media. ofce. Chapter 3, "The 'Glamour Girls' of Con‐ When she recounts briefy (in a penultimate chap‐ gress," describes the perils and foibles of Helen ter) the role that women as journalists have Gahagan Douglas and , who be‐ played covering women and their own experi‐ tween them served a total of ten years in Congress ences as women in a male profession, again the and who left little statutory legacy. treatment is cursory. She recounts, for example, Braden relinquishes her strict chronology and that in 1948, Pauline Frederick became a full-time thumbnail biographies once she gets to 1970, and political reporter at ABC News. During the 1950s, the latter two-thirds of the book beneft from the her beat was the United Nations and in 1960 she more topical organization. Braden observes that anchored the network's radio convention cover‐ the "women angle" becomes a beneft to some age. But Braden ofers not a word to explain this women with the rise of the women's movement unusual success. and the growing distaste for the seasoned politi‐ In lieu of close explication, Braden relies on cian. A brief chapter on explores, in a interviews, a handful of published studies and bi‐ thoughtful way, the media role in capitalizing on a ographies, and illustrations from contemporary famboyant woman political fgure whose actions newspapers to support some modest observa‐ provoked controversy. Braden continues this dis‐ tions. Assessing the contemporary political scene, cussion in subsequent chapters on the debate Braden notes that if the media began by focusing about when gender is a relevant aspect of a candi‐ on women's appearance and holding them to date's vita and when it is a gratuitous focus, de‐ higher standards of rectitude, by 1995 such treat‐ signed to delegitimate a candidate. ment now extends to men. Private lives of candi‐ Yet her discussion of the 1980s and 1990s fal‐ dates and politicians, male and female, have be‐ ters again because Braden tries to assess too many come fair game for "investigative reporting," and races in which women participate rather than an‐ the press now routinely comments on President alyzing a few. Anecdotes proliferate, but we re‐ Clinton's physique. The presence of women re‐ ceive little help in distinguishing merely shoddy porters helps to call attention to new stories and

2 H-Net Reviews new angles but, Braden cautions, cannot guaran‐ tee fair coverage or even more attention to wom‐ en newsmakers. She ends her book with a discussion of wom‐ en who ran for president--all of whom she ap‐ plauds--from the maverick to the pragmatic , although the impact of the media is difcult to assess from her discus‐ sion. Braden concludes the chapter and the vol‐ ume with a remark from Eleanor Clift, that jour‐ nalists should realize "that the gender of a woman politician is the least remarkable thing about her." But if, in 1997, that statement is true, we need to ask why it makes any diference to have women elected to ofce. Copyright (c) 1997 by H-Net, all rights re‐ served. This work may be copied for non-proft educational use if proper credit is given to the au‐ thor and the list. For other permission, please con‐ tact [email protected].

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-women

Citation: Cynthia Harrison. Review of Braden, Maria. Women Politicians and the Media. H-Women, H- Net Reviews. January, 1997.

URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=765

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

3